Sparrow
Veteran
😀😀
Advice on LSM purchase
- Thread starter traveler_101
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 65
- Views 7K
😀😀
maddoc
... likes film again.
My IIIf (BD) has a problem with very narrow frame-spacing and my IIIb exposures down (up ?) into the sprocket holes. I am just scanning a roll of PAN-F where I mounted the Ilford canister together with a ~ 2mm thick and cutted into round shape piece of felt, no solution. FILCA cassettes are the only solution for me when using the IIIb.
As others have mentioned, a M2 would be a nice M for the start and an M4-P or M4-2 maybe even better because newer and less worn out.
As others have mentioned, a M2 would be a nice M for the start and an M4-P or M4-2 maybe even better because newer and less worn out.
Sparrow
Veteran
... or
traveler_101
American abroad
Hi David,
Now I'm facing "terrifying decisions": from mystical-memory to the sublime 😱. Yes, if I had the money I would get both the Barrack and a M2 right NOW, plus a few lenses. Unfortunately, I will have to decide which one to get--and time is of the essence; I am back in the USA in two weeks and am there for only two weeks. A summitar huh . . .?
Nomad Z
Well-known
I don't know what constitutes a lot, but the M2 and 35mm is superb for street photography - easily beats the IIIf for the fast candid stuff. My street outfit is the M2+35, with the Rollei in the pocket as a backup. The IIIf stays at home.
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
Not so. Every Cosina Bessa ever made is bigger than an M2. Even the Bessa-L (no VF, no RF) is. Not by much, but it's a fact, and of course any VF you add makes it even taller.
By the way, would you mind not calling them "Barracks"? It's Barnack with an n, after the inventor, Oskar Barnack.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Quite. The fig-trees are losing their leaves here, but there were still a couple of good figs on one of the local public trees. It grows in the wall of a ruin just below the 1000-year-old castle I can see from my study window. there's a quasi-mystical link with the past for you: I moved to the village about 10 years ago.
As I was picking the figs, I thought that photography is a bit like fig-hunting. You get a couple of indifferent ones, then a really good one, and you ought to stop, but you search for another good one... and get a couple more indifferent ones. Then I realized that chasing cameras is much the same: you're always looking for a really good one. Which is why I've used Leicas since I was 19, in 1969.
If you want to chase pictures, get the M2. If (as sounds to be the case) you already have enough cameras that pictures aren't the question, get a screw-mount. I suspect, though, that while the purchase of (say) a IIIc might lead to the purchase on an M2, the reverse is less likely to be the case.
Cheers,
R.
FrankS
Registered User
Traveller, relax. You only need to decide which camera (M or SM) to get FIRST. 🙂
I suggest actually holding each kind. Your hands will help you to decide.
Last edited:
traveler_101
American abroad
Sorry about the careless mistake; I have read about Barnack so I should have known better.
Bingley
Veteran
One other point: you have a Bessa T, which is like a IIIf w/ mod cons. Metaphysics aside, the shooting experience ain't that different from a Barnack Leica. The M2 is different, and I think you'd appreciate the bright vf and uncluttered framelines. Your LTM lenses will work on the M2. I think the M2 and Bessa T is a fine two-camera kit for travel. In fact, it was precisely that combo that I took w/ me to Scandinavia and England this past summer, along w/ three small LTM lenses.
Bingley
Veteran
Traveler, this could be you... the M2 is calling to you...😉😀
Travel Companions by bingley0522, on Flickr
Travel Companions by bingley0522, on Flickr
traveler_101
American abroad
Well, the logic for acquiring the M2 is compelling: much of what I've heard are things which I have read elsewhere, though I did not know that the M2 was around the size of the Bessa, the handling of which I enjoy; I thought the M2 was a substantially larger camera so that removes one of the objections I had to it. Steve, yes, I like the idea of keeping the Bessa-T as part of a two camera traveling kit.
The cheapest M2 I can find now is a Bargain grade at KEH at 665, but several people have said not to buy worn equipment--so I am not sure; a high quality one at KEH is at 900 and up, or 875 with CLA at Igor Camera Exchange--if that is a good place to do business. Anyone know? This is a lot of money.
The cheapest M2 I can find now is a Bargain grade at KEH at 665, but several people have said not to buy worn equipment--so I am not sure; a high quality one at KEH is at 900 and up, or 875 with CLA at Igor Camera Exchange--if that is a good place to do business. Anyone know? This is a lot of money.
lawnpotter
Well-known
However, I think a Bessa is quite a bit lighter. The M2 is 580 grams( I think) and the Bessa R2a is 430 grams(I think)
Luddite Frank
Well-known
😀😀
That's a delicious-looking Barnack, Sparrow...
IIIa with factory flash sync upgrade ?
Bobbo
Well-known
Finally, a Leica question I'm almost qualified to answer 🙂.
Hey, Traveler. I'm the owner of a IIIf and a Canon P.
When I unwrapped my IIIf, all I could think was "Oh my God, this camera is sooooo tiny!" Holding it, then the P, is a dramatic difference (The P is close to an M2, I've been told). I've been an SLR guy most of my life, and the difference is extraordinary. It will make your Bessa T (which is actually an SLR with the mirror ripped out) look like a behemoth.
There are some quirks with the IIIf. I find, unless I'm careful, the slow shutter speed dial "bites" my knuckle when unscrewing a lens (I'm an idiot 🙂). You will learn knob rewind (which you'd still have with the M2) is very, very slooow. Knob wind isn't nearly as bad, though. You have to trim the leader (count 14 holes and cut... not hard in practice). The camera also screams for a) a collapsible lens or b) a super-wide-angle lens. Either is best shot at a hyperfocal distance... which is how I shoot most non-AF cameras, actually...
It's an interesting camera. Just don't expect it to be anything more than it is: a basic picture-taking machine designed to be the top-of-the-line miniature camera... almost 90 years ago (2024 is the Barnack's centennial. Save the date if the world doesn't end in 13 months).
Then again, the Barnack lived with only minor updates (I mean, you could make a Ia basically into a IIIf with the right parts) for 30 years. Put a Nikon F3 next to a D3x and you'll see how far we've come in the last 30 years.
Hey, Traveler. I'm the owner of a IIIf and a Canon P.
When I unwrapped my IIIf, all I could think was "Oh my God, this camera is sooooo tiny!" Holding it, then the P, is a dramatic difference (The P is close to an M2, I've been told). I've been an SLR guy most of my life, and the difference is extraordinary. It will make your Bessa T (which is actually an SLR with the mirror ripped out) look like a behemoth.
There are some quirks with the IIIf. I find, unless I'm careful, the slow shutter speed dial "bites" my knuckle when unscrewing a lens (I'm an idiot 🙂). You will learn knob rewind (which you'd still have with the M2) is very, very slooow. Knob wind isn't nearly as bad, though. You have to trim the leader (count 14 holes and cut... not hard in practice). The camera also screams for a) a collapsible lens or b) a super-wide-angle lens. Either is best shot at a hyperfocal distance... which is how I shoot most non-AF cameras, actually...
It's an interesting camera. Just don't expect it to be anything more than it is: a basic picture-taking machine designed to be the top-of-the-line miniature camera... almost 90 years ago (2024 is the Barnack's centennial. Save the date if the world doesn't end in 13 months).
Then again, the Barnack lived with only minor updates (I mean, you could make a Ia basically into a IIIf with the right parts) for 30 years. Put a Nikon F3 next to a D3x and you'll see how far we've come in the last 30 years.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Get a Barnack! You won't get the feeling of that way of shooting (a historical thing) with an M2... I guess you have great "tools" already, but if you get a camera (M2) with the possibility of different frame lines, and with one single window both for VF (composing) and RF (focusing), you'll never know what the simpler design of Barnacks makes us do as photographers...
As you, I used my two Bessas T (apart from other RFs and SLRs) before I got my Barnack... It's a very nice experience: every photographer should have a Barnack... I got a cheap IIIF Black Dial from KEH (Bargain) and sent it to Youxin Ye... Indeed KEH did send the camera to Youxin, so I received it "new"... Price for camera and Youxin's great work was less than $300... Then I got a collapsible I-50 (3.5) just as good as original Leica Elmars, but coated, and then a Jupiter-3 (50 1.5) for speed and selective focus... Both lenses less than $300 again... During the 50's some FSU lenses used Zeiss optical designs, German machinery, German technicians and even German (Zeiss) glass... Some samples have problems, but good ones are very very good.
So, $500-$600 for a Barnack, the camera than begun it all (to exaggerate it a bit), a great collapsible 50, and a great fast 50, and the camera CLA'd by a wonderful technician, means I got a lot for little money
An M2 doesn't replace a Barnack, because an M2 (as other forum member pointed) is -even if a totally great and beautiful camera- one that's a lot closer to our days and to most modern RFs... With the more basic and slow ways of shooting a Barnack imposes, we feel and shoot differently... A most important reason to get one!!
Cheers,
Juan
As you, I used my two Bessas T (apart from other RFs and SLRs) before I got my Barnack... It's a very nice experience: every photographer should have a Barnack... I got a cheap IIIF Black Dial from KEH (Bargain) and sent it to Youxin Ye... Indeed KEH did send the camera to Youxin, so I received it "new"... Price for camera and Youxin's great work was less than $300... Then I got a collapsible I-50 (3.5) just as good as original Leica Elmars, but coated, and then a Jupiter-3 (50 1.5) for speed and selective focus... Both lenses less than $300 again... During the 50's some FSU lenses used Zeiss optical designs, German machinery, German technicians and even German (Zeiss) glass... Some samples have problems, but good ones are very very good.
So, $500-$600 for a Barnack, the camera than begun it all (to exaggerate it a bit), a great collapsible 50, and a great fast 50, and the camera CLA'd by a wonderful technician, means I got a lot for little money
An M2 doesn't replace a Barnack, because an M2 (as other forum member pointed) is -even if a totally great and beautiful camera- one that's a lot closer to our days and to most modern RFs... With the more basic and slow ways of shooting a Barnack imposes, we feel and shoot differently... A most important reason to get one!!
Cheers,
Juan
lawnpotter
Well-known
one note: Youxin Yee recomended to me to get a IIIf RD over the BD. He said that the IIIf RD and IIIG ued a new lighter shutter design which was smoother and quieter. I had a IIIg once and it was very smooth and quiet. Mind you I just bought a Leica standard and I think it is quieter than my IIIg was before I sold it.
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I can only relate my own experience. I had two IIIf's. A BD and a RD. I didn't intend to have two - thought I'd make a good one out of two but ended up with two good ones to start with. They are magical, mystical, fondle-able cameras and you'll find yourself stroking it and saying "My Precious". They're more compact than the Bessa (if they have the collapsible Elmar lens) and heavier. I took mine wherever I travelled including many trips to India. But with a Summitar 2/50 they're a weight and not pocketable. I used a VCII meter in the accessory shoe.
And the viewfinder and focus is "squinty". Things did improve after the 50's.
I have neither today. Whilst they are wonderful things to admire and look at they are not all that convenient or fast in use and I decided to get an M6 instead because to me the image is the thing that counts more. Not quite as fondle-able as a IIIf but superbly designed and built - and heavy! What I've found interesting is the comparison with the Bessas. I had an R3A and still have an R4A. I like wide angle and I like the fact that the M6 has framelines for 28mm but I quite often shoot wider than that at 25 or 21.
In general, the Bessa's are lighter, well enough constructed to withstand normal use, the A- type models have AE which can be very useful in so-called "street" photography or even family situations. Both my Bessas had/have a little window which reveals the film cartridge so you are never in doubt about what film you have loaded, and they have a shutter lock so you don't get accidental exposures while the camera is in your bag.
The M6 does not have any of these three features.
Don't get me wrong - I love the M6 and there's an emotional element to having a Leica - but in practical terms if I was starting again and limited to one camera I'd get a Bessa R2A. It has framelines for 35mm through to 90mm and for anything wider than 35mm I'd be quite OK with slipping the appropriate viewfinder into the accessory shoe. As you go wider the focus becomes less critical anyway.
So, my opinion. If you want something to fondle and admire and are prepared to put up with the inadequacies of 60-70 year-old design features as part of that experience, get a IIIf.
If you want something that functionally is better and easier to use, get yourself an R2A and whatever lenses and viewfinders you need if going wider than 35mm FOV.
Or get both! 😱
And the viewfinder and focus is "squinty". Things did improve after the 50's.
I have neither today. Whilst they are wonderful things to admire and look at they are not all that convenient or fast in use and I decided to get an M6 instead because to me the image is the thing that counts more. Not quite as fondle-able as a IIIf but superbly designed and built - and heavy! What I've found interesting is the comparison with the Bessas. I had an R3A and still have an R4A. I like wide angle and I like the fact that the M6 has framelines for 28mm but I quite often shoot wider than that at 25 or 21.
In general, the Bessa's are lighter, well enough constructed to withstand normal use, the A- type models have AE which can be very useful in so-called "street" photography or even family situations. Both my Bessas had/have a little window which reveals the film cartridge so you are never in doubt about what film you have loaded, and they have a shutter lock so you don't get accidental exposures while the camera is in your bag.
The M6 does not have any of these three features.
Don't get me wrong - I love the M6 and there's an emotional element to having a Leica - but in practical terms if I was starting again and limited to one camera I'd get a Bessa R2A. It has framelines for 35mm through to 90mm and for anything wider than 35mm I'd be quite OK with slipping the appropriate viewfinder into the accessory shoe. As you go wider the focus becomes less critical anyway.
So, my opinion. If you want something to fondle and admire and are prepared to put up with the inadequacies of 60-70 year-old design features as part of that experience, get a IIIf.
If you want something that functionally is better and easier to use, get yourself an R2A and whatever lenses and viewfinders you need if going wider than 35mm FOV.
Or get both! 😱
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi (again),
If buying in a shop and not on ebay (gasp!), then I'd ask what lens was on it when it came in. Only because I like to have the lens and body matching. Trying to get a 1946 (say) body and then a 1945 or '46 lens as two items can be a pita.
BTW, no one has told you about the flash on the M2 etc (or I've missed it). They don't have a "hot-shoe" but the more refined accessory clip. And the flash socket is not the usual 3mm coaxial. Plus, there are two odd flash sockets. So you need a white plug in one and the adapter in the other (and spares as they are small and easily lost). The shop ought to throw them in as make-weights but on ebay...
Here's the back of my old M2 showing everything; left to right on the back cover a 3mm plug, the adapter, the white plug in cover and the Leica flash plug. Either plug will poke you in the eye if not chosen carefully and worse with glasses.
NB The M2 has a lever wind, that's an important distinction when discussing the old and new.
Regards, David
Last edited:
Sparrow
Veteran
Last edited:
